The Fate of the Donbas:

The fall of Severodonetsk marks a shift in the Ukraine-Russia war as it brings Russia another step closer to achieving its short-term and long-term military objectives. Despite the city sustaining weeks of bombardment by Russian forces and fierce close-quarter combat, the Severodonetsk actually holds little military significance to both sides of the conflict. Rather, it is emblematic of how the conflict is shifting into a war of attrition based on which side can better sustain consistent manpower, equipment, and supplies. After putting up a tough resistance, Ukrainian troops have tactically retreated across the Siversky Donets river to the neighbouring city of Lysychansk just west of Severodonetsk. Tactically, Lysychansk offers a natural defensive advantage with the river providing a natural barrier; the city also sits on a hill 150 metres higher than Severodonetsk. This means Russian forces face the difficult challenge of crossing the Donets river whilst fighting uphill against a heavily entrenched force. Despite these challenges, Ukrainian forces embedded in Lysychansk such as the 112th Defence Brigade and 1st Assault Company face encirclement once again as they did when they defended Severodonetsk. The capture of Severodonetsk for Russia serves as a significant stepping stone in its long-term military objective to secure and ‘liberate’ the Donbas region (one of its initial stated war aims at the start of the conflict). The battle for Lysychansk will soon determine whether this goal can be achieved. 

If Lysychansk were to fall it would effectively grant Russia effective control over Luhansk. This would pave the way for Russia to set its sights on the industrial cities of Sloviansk (already within range of Russian artillery) and Kramatorsk. Russian military tactics have drastically changed over the course of the conflict learning from its failure to capture Kyiv. In the beginning of the conflict, Russia relied upon rapid blitz-like tactics in an attempt to ‘overwhelm’ enemy forces. Such a stratagem however was riddled with supply-line issues, unable to sustain fuel and supplies to its armour and troops fast enough. After a withdrawal from the outskirts of Kyiv to refocus its efforts on the Eastern front, Russia is now rapidly concentrating its forces and tactically deploying them in concentrated areas as we have seen in Severodonetsk. Supply lines in the East now directly run from Russia to the frontlines. This allows Russia to more sufficiently fuel and quickly arm its forces in the East than it was able to at the start of the conflict. Russia also holds a large advantage in terms of raw firepower outnumbering Ukrainian artillery fire ten to one. The city Severodonetsk was heavily battered by Russian artillery destroying all critical infrastructure within the city and over 90% of houses were shelled. In addition, Russia also claims advantage to an arsenal of long-range rockets which effectively lets them harass Ukrainian positions without the possibility of return fire. This becomes a real problem for cities like Sloviansk which are already within range of Russian rockets. Russia’s raw firepower, in turn, has shifted Ukrainian tactics to favour urban warfare over open-field battles. This makes the fall of cities like Severodonetsk or Mariupol and the defence of Lysychansk all the more important as Ukrainian troops hope to draw Russia into close-quarter combat and away from superior firepower. If Sloviansk and Kramatorsk were to both fall it would bring Donetsk province under Russian control and allow Russia to fully consolidate its position in the Donbas. 

New opportunities:

The potentiality of Russia securing the Donbas region could open up new opportunities to refocus its efforts on Kharkiv which was previously successfully defended by Ukrainian forces. This time more resources could be concentrated on the city, afterall it was Russian troops who withdrew from Kharkiv to support the push into Severodonetsk and secure Luhansk and Donetsk provinces. Furthermore, securing the Donbas would also allow Russia to step-up and secure other long-term military objectives like the prized city of Odessa which remains significant for both economic and military reasons. Economically Odessa stands as Ukraine’s biggest port which handles two-thirds of all cargo by sea and is Ukraine’s biggest source of imports and exports. The capture of Odessa would result in a huge economic blow for the Ukrainian economy which is already expected to contract by 45% this year. Militarily Odessa would enable Russia to pursue its long-term military objective of cutting off Ukraine’s access to the sea, effectively making it a landlocked country. The capture of Mariupol by Russian forces in May has already made this a possibility. The fall of Mariupol remains significant for two reasons - first, it granted Russia entire control of trade and access to the Sea of Azov and secondly, it solidified Russia’s position over its land bridge in the Kerch Strait which directly connects mainland Russia to the Crimean peninsula. This 12-mile bridge, which opened in 2018 already carries millions of tons of cargo each year. Control over the Sea of Azov now leaves Russia virtually uncontested in these waters. The same could be said for the entire northern coast of the Black Sea which is effectively blockaded by Russia including the port-city of Odessa. An estimated 14 million tons of corn, 7 million tons of wheat, and 3 million tons of sunflower seeds are prevented from reaching global markets, sparking what many already fear to be a global food crisis. 

Despite Russian gains in the South over the Sea of Azov several military obstacles remain. The biggest is the port city of Mykolaiv which is often seen as the gateway to Odessa. Mykolaiv sustained months of Russian bombardment and has been a staging point for Ukrainians to mount counter-attacks in neighbouring Kherson to delay any Russian advance. The effectiveness of Ukrainian counter-attacks are yet to be seen. Another military challenge for Russia is how it exactly plans to take the city of Odessa. While an amphibious landing appears unlikely it should not be entirely ruled out. Ukraine has prepared itself by riddling its waters with hundreds of sea mines to deter an amphibious assault but Russia too has laid mines as well, preventing foreign ships from leaving Ukrainian waters. In addition, neighbouring Snake Island just 45km away from Romania could be an important staging ground for an amphibious landing with Vylkove being a natural target before hitting Odessa. Russia previously held a reconnaissance station and a contingent of marine commandos from the 388th division on Snake Island. Nevertheless, Russia’s recent withdrawal from Snake Island after Ukrainian efforts to remove them now makes an amphibious landing a distant prospect. Alternatively, others fear Russia may utilise an estimated 1,500 ‘peacekeeping force’ in neighbouring Transnistria (a breakaway state in Moldova economically reliant on Russia) in a pincer movement to surround Odessa from the West and the East. This seems unlikely as well, given that the 1,500 troops stationed in Transnistria lack combat efficiency and therefore pose little military threat to Odessa. However, despite these military challenges Odessa remains in range within Russia’s Bastion-B anti ship cruise missiles held in Crimea. Holding a range of 300km these long range missiles are capable of destroying both ground and sea targets. Together with the blockade of the Ukrainian ports the actuality for Russia might be to carry on a slog of an offensive through Mykolaiv then to Odessa however it won’t do so without the support of its missiles.

The question still looms about whether there is an end in sight. What becomes clear in a war of attrition is simply whether proper logistics and supplies can supply and resupply troops on the ground fast enough and who can hold out the longest. Whilst Odessa holds huge significant military and economic significance for both sides we must not forget that during the Second World War the city fell victim to the hands of Nazi barbarism - surviving through a siege, occupation, and the eventual massacre of its Jewish population. Odessa is a galvanising reminder of the spirit of resistance and resilience facing civilian populations not just in Odessa but in a time of war.